Racist terminology in chess problems

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Roger Lancaster
Posts: 1906
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by Roger Lancaster » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:32 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:25 pm
In all seriousness Roger, thank you very much, you've been most helpful.
As always, Justin, you're most welcome.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by JustinHorton » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:42 pm

Roger Lancaster wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:32 pm
In much the same way, I can see that "night watchman" will upset some cricket fans as sexist
Can we remind ourselves that we are discussing a term sufficiently loaded with meaning that it was employed for inflammatory effect in a racist speech still notorious half a century later. People should maybe bear that in mind when making comparisons (which may of course be illuminating) and they should perhaps also do so when seeking to judge the offensiveness of the term or the apparent fact that people were subsequently able to use it without considering whether or not they should.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

David Sedgwick
Posts: 5249
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:56 pm
Location: Croydon
Contact:

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by David Sedgwick » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:50 pm

David Sedgwick wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 12:10 pm
I agree with the decision to replace the headstone. The original wording only distracted from the message.
John Upham wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 12:57 pm
How would you answer the comments of historian James Holland?
I am confused. Have I not basically said that I agree with Mr Holland?

Brian Edgell sums up my thinking pretty well.

Edit: I'll leave it there. I have just realised that this discussion is taking place in a thread in which I stated I would not post again.
Last edited by David Sedgwick on Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 1906
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by Roger Lancaster » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:55 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:42 pm
Roger Lancaster wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:32 pm
In much the same way, I can see that "night watchman" will upset some cricket fans as sexist
Can we remind ourselves that we are discussing a term sufficiently loaded with meaning that it was employed for inflammatory effect in a racist speech still notorious half a century later. People should maybe bear that in mind when making comparisons (which may of course be illuminating) and they should perhaps also do so when seeking to judge the offensiveness of the term or the apparent fact that people were subsequently able to use it without considering whether or not they should.
Can we also remind ourselves that the use of a word frequently depends on the context in which it's used. By way of example, the words, "F--k you", can be interpreted as either friendly or offensive depending on context and tone.

Paul McKeown
Posts: 3732
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: Hayes (Middx)

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by Paul McKeown » Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:58 pm

David Sedgwick wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:50 pm
Brian Edgell sums up my thinking pretty well.
Agreed, David. Brian's contribution was clear, honest and wise.

Paul McKeown
Posts: 3732
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: Hayes (Middx)

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by Paul McKeown » Fri Jun 11, 2021 3:07 pm

It is a pity that the majority of the post's here are emotional incontinence from over-privileged, elderly white children, well past their bedtimes, spitting their dummies and throwing off their comfort blankets as the need of others are temporarily addressed. But I do also wish Justin would resist the temptation to hiss like an alley cat at every pissy provocation. He raised a matter that should be viewed as important to problemists, whether composers or solvers, and against his call for change the only arguments that are raised are those of latter day Pharisees.

User avatar
John Upham
Posts: 7162
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Contact:

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by John Upham » Fri Jun 11, 2021 3:30 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:42 pm
Roger Lancaster wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:32 pm
In much the same way, I can see that "night watchman" will upset some cricket fans as sexist
Can we remind ourselves that we are discussing a term sufficiently loaded with meaning that it was employed for inflammatory effect in a racist speech still notorious half a century later. People should maybe bear that in mind when making comparisons (which may of course be illuminating) and they should perhaps also do so when seeking to judge the offensiveness of the term or the apparent fact that people were subsequently able to use it without considering whether or not they should.
I was speculating how many posts it might take before someone introduces a fascinating debate about "manholes" and "manholes covers" and I'd say "Night watchman" is of similar vein.

Anyway, I've mentioned it once but I'm not sure if I will get away with it.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess :D

User avatar
Matt Mackenzie
Posts: 5191
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
Location: Millom, Cumbria

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by Matt Mackenzie » Fri Jun 11, 2021 3:52 pm

Brian is referring to the Adventures Of Dan The Pawn book, I presume.

As I mentioned just the other day, I recall that causing a bit of a stir at the time.
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5802
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri Jun 11, 2021 5:37 pm

"Seriously, this topic seems to have generated quite a bit of heat. Language evolves. What was once acceptable may no longer be and vice versa. But before getting overly concerned it is worth remembering that the acceptability, or otherwise, of words is a gradual thing and that people will move at a different pace. Provided the user is not deliberately trying to offend, I have no problem with that.
As an example, consider some of our more extreme swear words. These were once acceptable Anglo Saxon terms which were superseded by the 'more polite Norman equivalents. Whilst still unacceptable to most of the population their usage is increasing again and may soon become common place."

I hesitate to agree with Alex, but I think he's right.

Matthew Turner
Posts: 3600
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by Matthew Turner » Fri Jun 11, 2021 11:02 pm

Roger Lancaster wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 1:19 pm
I surely can't be alone in wishing that more time and effort was spent in combatting ultra-right-wing groups with unashamedly racist views and rather less on arguing over a word, admittedly inappropriate in today's climate, written without racist intent in a context where its existence would - but for this thread - have remained largely unnoticed and thus have caused offence to very few, if anyone.
No you are not
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57406673

J T Melsom
Posts: 1294
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 11:12 pm

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by J T Melsom » Fri Jun 11, 2021 11:13 pm

Confronting proper Nazis and challenging racism aren't exactly binary choices are they? And many of those posting here seem to be struggling with the latter so I wouldn't expect they would be able to handle the rather more complex circumstances of the former. Do posters here challenge racism when they hear it in pubs either directly or by reporting it to the staff. I don't think posters here are racist, but I'm not convinced many would challenge racism either.

Matthew Turner
Posts: 3600
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 11:54 am

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by Matthew Turner » Fri Jun 11, 2021 11:17 pm

To take on Justin's mantel perhaps you could provide us with concrete examples of where your actions went beyond mere shallow virtue signalling.

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 1906
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by Roger Lancaster » Fri Jun 11, 2021 11:39 pm

J T Melsom wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 11:13 pm
Confronting proper Nazis and challenging racism aren't exactly binary choices are they? And many of those posting here seem to be struggling with the latter so I wouldn't expect they would be able to handle the rather more complex circumstances of the former. Do posters here challenge racism when they hear it in pubs either directly or by reporting it to the staff. I don't think posters here are racist, but I'm not convinced many would challenge racism either.
I've sat through courses where the lecturer has argued, and it doesn't seem to me an unreasonable argument, that virtually everyone is racist to some extent. That follows from racism being founded on prejudice and it's a brave man [or woman] who claims to have no prejudices. For example, we choose friends and lovers based very much on prejudice - often choosing persons who, in one way or another, are like us. The important thing, so the argument goes, is to recognise one's own prejudices and not act on them in a way offensive to or detrimental to others.

User avatar
Carl Hibbard
Posts: 6028
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:05 pm
Location: Evesham

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by Carl Hibbard » Sat Jun 12, 2021 7:17 am

J T Melsom wrote:
Wed Jun 09, 2021 5:40 pm
I reported this post yesterday for 'silliness'.
Again the recommendation is the use of the foe list for any members simply getting on your nerves.
Cheers
Carl Hibbard

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 3484
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Racist terminology in chess problems

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sat Jun 12, 2021 9:12 am

John Upham wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 3:30 pm
I was speculating how many posts it might take before someone introduces a fascinating debate about "manholes" and "manholes covers"
Hi John,

Threads like this often go the way of those step ladder puzzles.
Change Rook to Pawn in five steps: ROOK - look - loon - loan - lawn - PAWN.
In five pages this thread has gone from a chess problem to a freshly jailed neo nazi.

I'm just passing by Justin, not taking the thread over but in an effort to get your point back on track.
The book you mentioned at the start of the thread.

Image

It revolves around Problem No 62 and in the solutions the author appears uncomfortable with the term. He feels a need to explain it.

"Kindly meant when this type problem was labelled some fifty years ago [it was 1916] is the tag Pickaninny
It was meant to be a graphic summing up of the four eye-catching moves of the baby Black Pawn and the name has stuck."

The debate is: (and I think most agree) is it about time it became 'unstuck.'

For the sake of completeness, I'll give the problem in question. It might spark an idea for a new term.

(Mansfield 1962) White has just played 1.Ne4-f6.



Ignoring Black King moves. a Pickaninny is all four different moves available to the e7 pawn result in four different mates in one.
Last edited by Geoff Chandler on Sat Jun 12, 2021 12:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply